So, maybe I'll try a three-stager

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
So, I did the flight Friday morning. Been spending lots of time trying to find the pieces. Got the first stage and stabilization section back on Friday, and today, we found the third stage. The second stage is still AWOL. The flight was certainly not perfect. Got 130K altitude, which was good, and I have lots of interesting data and videos. Unfortunately, the first stage didn't separate from the stabilization section, so the vertical stabilization system couldn't work. I don't know why that happened, and it's too bad because it was a big focus for the flight. I'll post more data when I have time.

Jim

Hmmmmmmm, If I understand your plan Jim, you were going to have the 1st stage separate after burnout, before the rocket coasted for 18 seconds and before the second stage fired. The stabilization module would stay attached to the upper two segments to ensure stability in the coast phase of the upper two stages and then be jettisoned just before the second stage fired? My question would be did the video or data suggest the flight was nominally stable during the 2nd stage firing when the 1st stage and the stabilization unit fell away together instead of separately? I mean shoot, if the direction of flight was reasonable perhaps the stabilization unit had some effect even though it remained attached with the 1st stage booster?

130k isn't too shoddy but yeah it probably would have gone higher if it performed as planned. Hope you find that second stage. Kurt Savegnago
 
Hey Jim, Here's the footage I got. It was great meeting you and helping put this thing on the pad. Congrats on the sucessful flight!

[video=youtube;9pfy_Nyc9z8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pfy_Nyc9z8[/video]

Put a P15,000 on the bottom next year? :wink:

Casper
 
Jim,
I emailed you a video I got of your flight but it didn't go through. I have too many emails for you. I'll try to send it again, but Caspers video is much better. Real nice flight. I hope you find the second stage! Sorry the Active stabilization didn't work.
Terry
 
Hey Jim, Here's the footage I got. It was great meeting you and helping put this thing on the pad. Congrats on the sucessful flight!

Put a P15,000 on the bottom next year? :wink:

Casper

Thanks so much for taking and posting this. It will likely be the best view of the flight, due to the vantage point, the focus, and the appropriately timed expletives. And thanks also for helping with the preparation. Every year, I seem to get a great group of pad slaves. This year was no different and I really appreciate that folks are willing to spend part of their launch day helping me out.

No idea what next year will bring. A P-something is an option - we'll see. I promise I will post some data before too long. I still have flight computers that haven't even been downloaded yet, but I'm getting there.

Jim
 
So it's been about a week and a half since this flight, and I'm still not quite sure what to make of it. It was an interesting flight for sure, and the data available is un-ending. It will be a month or more before everything is digested.

On the good side, we got the rocket to the launch and on the pad with no major incidents. I'm proud of that, as this project is right at the limit of the complexity that I can manage. We got all three motors lit - including a Gorilla moonburner at 36,000 feet - and apogee was at 130,570 feet, my highest flight. And like I said, there's lots of data to analyze. On the down side, I lost the second stage of the rocket - bummer. In addition, the first stage did not separate as planned, so the vertical stabilization system didn't have a chance to function. Consequently, the rocket flew at a bit of an angle, and it was a long walk to recover the third stage. What's interesting though is that there are things that happened where I thought I was unlucky, where maybe it will turn out the other way around - and vice versa. I don't know the ending to the story yet.

Before starting in on the data, I should thank a few people. First off, the flight wouldn't have happened without Zebedee's help (thanks Martin). Steve and Manny made some key contributions at the pad, and I'm sure glad Alex captured the video. Tony, as usual, set hands on several of the parts and tried his best to find the second stage, and Deb took us out in her 4-wheel drive vehicle for a little more searching. There are about a hundred other people that contributed to this in some way - thanks! My wife helped too (trust me on this).

So, to the data. There will be some on-board video for this flight, including a side-facing camera and an upward-facing camera, mounted on the first stage. The video is being processed, but I think you will find it pretty interesting. It was a wild ride.

Attached is a data plot from the EasyMega in the third stage. The first event in the flight was a bit of a turn about a second after launch. You can see that in the video Alex took. I suspect that this was wind shear. The rocket straightened up a little, but it was wobbling somewhat. At four seconds, there was a separation charge that was supposed to separate the first stage from the stabilization spool, leaving the stabilization spool to vertically stabilize the rocket during the coast period until the second stage lit. You can see that the charge fired, but separation didn't occur. The attached picture shows the video frames just before and after this separation charge. The parts tried to separate, but didn't make it. It is possible that the wobbling of the rocket at this point tightened this joint and prevented separation. This is one of those events where I'm not quite sure yet if I was lucky or unlucky.

With the draggy booster still attached, the rocket slowed down quicker than expected. When the second stage lit, the rocket had slowed to under 300 ft/s (was supposed to be more like 750 ft/s). I guess I'm lucky that the motor didn't take any longer than it did to come up to pressure, but the rocket did develop a little tilt just before the motor lit.

I had originally intended to light the third stage about 40 seconds into the flight and at 40,000 feet. Due to the frisky upper-level winds, I attempted to reduce this by about 10 seconds. Unfortunately, I programmed the EasyMega incorrectly (in the way that I incorporated an altitude check). Check back a few posts where I posted the program. The problem in the logic is obvious - now - but I overlooked it and no one else caught it. The net effect was to delay the third stage igniter by about 4 seconds past the point where I wanted it to light (lucky - it could have been worse). Then, the motor took over 6 seconds to come up to pressure, and lit at 36K feet. Those factors pretty much got me back to the original flight plan. So, off to apogee we went, and a pic on the way there is attached.

The above summary doesn't begin to capture all of the stuff that actually happened on this flight. Maybe I'll post more later if we can separate cause and effect, or post what will eventually be a rather long list of lessons-learned. And I will post the on-board video when it's ready.

Jim

Mega 2 anotated.jpg

Gap comparison 2.jpg

Snapshot_35.jpg
 
Last edited:
Amazing, Jim. I love how you are saying you got lucky and aren't sure what to take away from the flight. I get that - everything didn't go perfectly - but man, that was an incredible achievement!! Though you didn't get separation/stabilization and didn't get the 3rd stage lit exactly on time, what you did was extremely impressive. It is a bummer that you didn't get the second stage back but still, that was a total success in my eyes. Impressively done!! :clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:
 
Here to Jim,,been following this thread from the start and the last picture really shows what a freaking cool flight this is, your workmanship and intelligence is very apparent . Hope you try this again one day

Can you fit a tracker in all three stages?
 
Can you fit a tracker in all three stages?

I had a tracker in the 2nd stage. I got a signal from it on the way down (so I know there was an apogee event), but never picked up a signal on the ground. That's pretty common on the Playa - you often have to be pretty close to get a signal there. We had a pretty good line, but Tony couldn't pick up a signal when he searched and neither could we. We just ran out of time.

Jim
 
Shoot,

Maybe get a Ham person and add a 70cm or 2 meter GPS tracker though 3 of them would be a chunk of change. If a 1st stage was expected to come down nearby, RDF that and use GPS in the upper two stages.
Only issue would be making certain the signals don't mess with the deployment electronics which the RDF trackers didn't do on this flight. Kurt Savegnago
 
Shoot,

Maybe get a Ham person and add a 70cm or 2 meter GPS tracker though 3 of them would be a chunk of change. If a 1st stage was expected to come down nearby, RDF that and use GPS in the upper two stages.
Only issue would be making certain the signals don't mess with the deployment electronics which the RDF trackers didn't do on this flight. Kurt Savegnago

The problem here is that with carbon airframes, the tracker, whether RDF or GPS, has to be attached to the harness. I can encase the Marshall transmitters in a PVC case to protect them, but I haven't found a suitable GPS for that (that is also affordable). It would need to acquire lock after leaving the airframe. If there was a suitable 70 cm GPS, I'd be interested. I do plan to ask Marshall about how I might use their GPS transmitter (since I have to replace one anyway).

Jim
 
Last edited:
Jim, It's always an adventure looking for your projects! I even have some scars from one of them! You "hiding" a turned on Tx in the case made for an interesting start for this years adventure. Once I figured that out the only other issue was getting my motorcycle out of the 'dry' river bed. I'll make a couple more treks out that way next year. I did find an MIA ARLISS rover while out there. So, I did find something.

rover.jpg
 
Jim, It's always an adventure looking for your projects! I even have some scars from one of them! You "hiding" a turned on Tx in the case made for an interesting start for this years adventure. Once I figured that out the only other issue was getting my motorcycle out of the 'dry' river bed. I'll make a couple more treks out that way next year. I did find an MIA ARLISS rover while out there. So, I did find something.

That was just to test your tracking skills and reasoning ability under field conditions:blush:

We ran into some wet areas too. Very exciting! Thanks again for trying!

Jim
 
The problem here is that with carbon airframes, the tracker, whether RDF or GPS, has to be attached to the harness. I can encase the Marshall transmitters in a PVC case to protect them, but I haven't found a suitable GPS for that (that is also affordable). It would need to acquire lock after leaving the airframe. If there was a suitable 70 cm GPS, I'd be interested. I do plan to ask Marshall about how I might use their GPS transmitter (since I have to replace one anyway).

Jim

That's a really good point I missed. The work-arounds wouldn't be easy for a flight of your caliber. Surface mounting copper foil for an antenna that could de-laminate due to heating of the fixating adhesive from frictional heating would be a challenge. Likewise a radio-lucent window in the airframe? Try and figure that one out.:shock: And then there's the problem of receiving the GPS signals inside the airframe. External GPS antenna? Yeah sure, try to figure out how to get that to stay affixed to the side of a scorching flight.:confused2:

The GPS tracker on the shockcord might be doable under a restrictive circumstance on a scenario like this: Get a GPS tracker that has a little coin cell battery backup for the memory and make sure the coin cell is fresh.
Put the tracker out in the open to get a satellite lock. Depending on the chipset it may take a little while and the device will download the ephemeris. Once one is getting a good position lock and here is the kicker, the key would be to get the tracker in the rocket quickly and launch it fast. Even though the CF airframe blocks the signals, once the device is ejected out into the breeze, with the ephemeris, it could re-establish the lock quickly so downside tracking can commence in a shorter timeframe.

But..........probably dern near impossible to do with what's required to get a three stager ready.:surprised: Plus there's the wait on the pad until there's an opening.

It would be feasible to test with a single stage all-CF rocket (including the nosecone) at the right venue for fast launch. But most folks mount the tracker in an FG nosecone with everything aft being CF.

I have a metallic painted FG rocket that proved the paint sucked up the Rf from inside the ebay where the Beeline GPS resided with the antenna projecting up into the main chute bay with a cardboard stent to keep the antenna from getting smushed. Rocket luckily recovered within sight but no Rf packets were received. I downloaded the .kml position memory file from the tracker and by golly it had a 7 to 11 satellite lock both up and down. A very nice Google Earth plot was plotted. Paint was translucent to the incoming GPS signal which I thought odd. So instead of repainting the rocket I was able to swap positions since my bay was completely symmetrical. The BLGPS rides in the proper position facing up so the G-switch works with a cable to the aft facing bulkhead antenna. The antenna gets ejected at apogee so I can start getting Rf packets on the way down.

Alas, I think CF kills GPS signal reception unless someone has tried and proven otherwise. Nonetheless Jim, still a tour de force in my book. Kurt Savegnago
 
Last edited:
I had a tracker in the 2nd stage. I got a signal from it on the way down (so I know there was an apogee event), but never picked up a signal on the ground. That's pretty common on the Playa - you often have to be pretty close to get a signal there. We had a pretty good line, but Tony couldn't pick up a signal when he searched and neither could we. We just ran out of time.

Jim

What you needed was a higher antenna. For RDF work this is tough but stand on top of something and get as high up as you can. Mounting the Yagi at the end of a tall pole wouldn't hurt either.

There are two things working against you here. The first is line of sight. If you can't see it, you will not get a signal. More or less. The other problem is that because the transmitting antenna is so close to the ground, there is very little signal propagated in the horizontal plane. HAMs take advantage of this when using NVIS. In that case they deliberately mount the antenna within a quarter wavelength of the ground.

The closer the transmit antenna is to the ground the worse it will be.
 
What you needed was a higher antenna. For RDF work this is tough but stand on top of something and get as high up as you can. Mounting the Yagi at the end of a tall pole wouldn't hurt either.

There are two things working against you here. The first is line of sight. If you can't see it, you will not get a signal. More or less. The other problem is that because the transmitting antenna is so close to the ground, there is very little signal propagated in the horizontal plane. HAMs take advantage of this when using NVIS. In that case they deliberately mount the antenna within a quarter wavelength of the ground.

The closer the transmit antenna is to the ground the worse it will be.

We were out searching with Deb (in her 4 wheel drive) and we found a spot where it would have been possible to get some elevation. I climbed up to an elevation of maybe 100 feet, but no joy. If we had had more time - a couple of hours, I think I could have gotten up as high as 1500 feet. This spot was too far out, but it would have been our best bet. Just ran out of time.

My wife climbed part way up as well, and she happened to spot an orange object flapping in the breeze a few hundred yards away. We were quite excited, but as we got closer, we could see that it was someone else's piece of orange nomex. Not a happy way to end our search.

Jim
 
If we had had more time - a couple of hours, I think I could have gotten up as high as 1500 feet. This spot was too far out, but it would have been our best bet.

That is good but what about the transmitter end? Where was the antenna?

Digging into the archives I see that Sue McMurray in her epic RMR post on tracking recommended that the antenna be inside the rocket:

4. The Xmtr should be housed completely within the airframe, before and after
deployment of the parachutes. We've tried extending the antenna through the
side of a carbon airframe and taping it down the side with Kapton tape, but the
signal then becomes very "one-sided" and is very difficult to track. We've
tried putting only the transmitter head into the nosecone and letting the
antenna hang out free after deployment. Ha! After the less than nominal
parachute deployment when the antenna was sheared off, I tracked only the head.
We've tried putting only the transmitter head into the payload bay and letting
the antenna hang out free after deployment, and had the payload lay down on the
antenna in a small ditch, bending it into a U shape and effectively attenuating
the signal to a whisper.

That is good because it ensures a minimum height above ground for the antenna. If it is laying on the ground, it is nearly useless. Unless you have a Cessna handy.
 
That is good but what about the transmitter end? Where was the antenna?

Digging into the archives I see that Sue McMurray in her epic RMR post on tracking recommended that the antenna be inside the rocket:



That is good because it ensures a minimum height above ground for the antenna. If it is laying on the ground, it is nearly useless. Unless you have a Cessna handy.

Kinda wish I knew the answer to that antenna question.

I put the Marshall transmitters in a little PVC case and then attached them to the harness. With carbon airframes, the transmitter has to come out of the airframe or you'll get nothing. One advantage of this is that you know you have an apogee event because you start hearing the transmitter. Once it's on the ground it's, well, on the ground, but that is always the case.

I tried the Cessna thing a few years back. Not with a tracker, just visual. No joy there either.

Jim

IMG_0235.jpg
 
Has anyone tried putting their receiver into an r/c airplane and cruising around at several hundred feet to try and receive a packet? If you wanted to be fancy you could use an autopilot to run a search pattern or an FPV setup for visual searching from the range.

I have no idea how useful it would be, or if it's even feasible in the launch environment of BALLS, but it seems like those tools are readily available and relatively cheap for rapidly getting an antenna high in the air. At the very least it would give you something else expensive and complicated to lose. :)
 
I put the Marshall transmitters in a little PVC case and then attached them to the harness. With carbon airframes, the transmitter has to come out of the airframe or you'll get nothing. One advantage of this is that you know you have an apogee event because you start hearing the transmitter. Once it's on the ground it's, well, on the ground, but that is always the case.

Jim,
Seems like you could do the same thing with the Marshall GPS unit. At least that would give you coordinates just before touchdown so that you do not have to RDF it after landing.
Vern
 
Kinda wish I knew the answer to that antenna question.

I suspect that puts the antenna far too close to the ground. Especially if the antenna is that wire sticking out. You might see slightly better performance if the tube were long enough to enclose the antenna. Along with some spacers to keep it centered. That would still be too close to the ground for even just awful performance.

The plots on this page show how the pattern changes as the height changes. It is in terms of wavelength so you can compare it to your setup. Well, probably not since you are much closer than 1/10th wavelength to the ground.
 
Jim,
Seems like you could do the same thing with the Marshall GPS unit. At least that would give you coordinates just before touchdown so that you do not have to RDF it after landing.
Vern

I asked the Marshall folks a few questions about their gps. One thing is that you have to have their complete system (can't just use the transmitter). And, I have no idea how their system would perform coming out of a carbon airframe after a significant displacement. Its rdf signal is on a receiver I don't have. I'd love to find out how the gps works, but at a grand, it's a bit pricey.

Jim
 
You could wrap an antenna around the airframe (foil, microstrip, etc.), then do a single layer of fiberglass over the body tube to protect the antenna. This gets rid of your RF issues, as well as you can use the CF as a decent ground plane. You would lose the nifty carbon look on the rocket but at least you wouldn't have to deal with the harness mounted RF.

For the gps receive antennas you could try making a helical antenna wound around the airframe. I do not know what effect the conductive airframe in the center of the antenna will have, but it's possible it might give you enough reception to get a gps lock while the rocket is fully integrated.

I am actually curious enough I kinda want to try this antenna style now.

Shame on the missing stage, hope it gets found! Awesome flight otherwise!
 
Hi Jim, I think GPS is likely to be your best bet. Trackers operate at VHF/UHF frequencies, well above the HF frequencies where skywave propagation for NVIS is possible - and when they are on the ground range is quite limited.

Good luck!
 
You could wrap an antenna around the airframe (foil, microstrip, etc.), then do a single layer of fiberglass over the body tube to protect the antenna. This gets rid of your RF issues, as well as you can use the CF as a decent ground plane. You would lose the nifty carbon look on the rocket but at least you wouldn't have to deal with the harness mounted RF.

For the gps receive antennas you could try making a helical antenna wound around the airframe. I do not know what effect the conductive airframe in the center of the antenna will have, but it's possible it might give you enough reception to get a gps lock while the rocket is fully integrated.

I am actually curious enough I kinda want to try this antenna style now.

Shame on the missing stage, hope it gets found! Awesome flight otherwise!
There are many conformal antenna designs used on the outside of metal and composite missiles but they are designed and manufactured by electronics engineers specifically for the missile. Surface mounted conformal strip antennas work fine and can be engineered to the exact frequency and bandwidth desired however you need a good math and electronics background and test equipment to finalize the dimensions and the matching. A step waveguide radiator is often used in military missiles but again they are custom designs and require a bit of electronics and math skills to design.

Bob
 
There are many conformal antenna designs used on the outside of metal and composite missiles but they are designed and manufactured by electronics engineers specifically for the missile. Surface mounted conformal strip antennas work fine and can be engineered to the exact frequency and bandwidth desired however you need a good math and electronics background and test equipment to finalize the dimensions and the matching. A step waveguide radiator is often used in military missiles but again they are custom designs and require a bit of electronics and math skills to design.

Bob

Conveniently I am an electrical engineer, and I do have access to the requisite test equipment. Though my recent move has made an anechoic chamber harder to access. I haven't done any actual antenna design yet but it is an interest for me.

Do you know of any good references about antennas for these kinds of applications?
 
Back
Top